|
Post by popmann on Dec 26, 2021 14:45:33 GMT -6
I will tell you after having a number of backup drives fail, i got spendy and got a Glyph Raid 1 system. Noisy as hell. Relativly slow, but i got the version with the industry stabdard Hitachi enterprise drives….i was a little disappointed to learn you cant just replace one if it fails….it has the individual status lights, but if/when one fails youre supposed to send it into Glyph for replacement….I figured like most hardware RAID, youd get whatever right spec drive and unplug the failed, and boot up with the new in and it would auto populate data from the good one.
Luckily, its been like 3+ years now and ihavent needed to test that.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 25, 2021 13:15:20 GMT -6
Yeah, I dont really get what advantage this has over the CC121-iguess its the control of the 64bit strip?…but it doesnt look like it follows mouse focus like the 121 does….and doesnt have a fader….its interesting to see how people’s brains work.
Im telling you….a single knob that emulates mouse wheel….will control third party plug ins….everything in the new channel strip….EQ….other than some third party plugs having issues with calibration, um Waves….i think I have a whole $35 in mine….and I use it more than the $2k MCU+Ext sitting on the desk. Hover mouse with right hand, turn big Griffin knob.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 24, 2021 13:59:42 GMT -6
I would absolutely REQUIRE the pro version of Abbey Road Two. One word: portamento. Strings without portamento transitions are not useable to me for pop music. There are too many times, my ear at least, wants them to slide between chords….i think there are other differences….mics? Tape recordings? More round robins? Anyway….maybe I just still feel burned by VSL….which the solo strings i would argue NEED the “extended” expensive version. But, no portamento is a deal breaker for me.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 22, 2021 22:42:48 GMT -6
I don't have Abbey Road Two. Nor anything with the new EW player. I have the old East West QLSO. Not installed for years. I think I DID put the latest PLAY on computer when I built it three (?) years ago, and quickly removed the libraries. The Hollywood strings were still big smarmy strings if I remember.
This incites GAS for me for a very specific reason--I've used Elenor Rigby as an example of iconic pop strings that literally can't be done well with say 90% of "string samples"...maybe more...they're all aimed at, um "composers" for music for video (and games)...it seemed to be to be a serious lack, given how many people I know who write songs and want strings--end up with something like East West or those lite VSL orchestral things--and they don't work because they never HAVE. Sure--Linda Ronstadt did that one pop record with a real orchestra--but that was NOVEL...most pop/soul/country strings are relatively small sections. So you had to kind of use solo strings in combination with some smaller chamber or divisi sections...mix and match libraries on a per song basis.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 22, 2021 21:17:00 GMT -6
I think he means something besides the Abbey Road Two...which is $399 for the "big" Pro version. Uses their new proprietary player like all their new stuff will.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 22, 2021 10:35:26 GMT -6
GAS induction.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 17, 2021 18:52:46 GMT -6
A, I assume, is the more dynamic master? The downside of that is that the snare is a bit loud and isolated compared to B in spots (nitpicky level)...the good side is that there's actually a little "downshift" (as there should be IMO) on the last line of the vocal down back to the drum loop.
I mean, honestly...kind of 6 of one-half dozen of the other. I prefer A...but, it's not like I think B is bad. It's just a little more limited--which makes the snare smaller and pushed back some...and makes the transition back to the drum machine a tad less emotional.
I feel like the ideal would be A...but, go back to the mix itself and turn the snare down say 2db...or maybe clip it a little--something that retains the bottom but pushes it back into the kit some.
First impression. Grain of salt.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 17, 2021 12:01:37 GMT -6
Not a fan. I might die running Cubase 10.5. Given that I ran v6 for a decade or something. I AM a little tempted to buy 11...because it's the last dongle protected version AND apparently they're giving you a v12 upgrade free when it's ready--with the dongle still working. IE--I could run 10.5 or 11 for as long as the dongle works with my OS...which on Windows? Ehh probably a long time...and then have a copy of 12 to put on whatever future not compatible machine.
Machine auths are painful when you have to reinstall. Anyone who has done this long enough gets what I tell about my new machine 3 years ago: Win10 and dongle protected software was installed and running in an hour, if that. It took DAYS to sort out the machine authorization packages. Obviously not like full time work days...but, waiting for replies...walking through online auth BS, only to find I need to log in and deactivate the Macbook or something etc...
But, also note that Cubase 12 will drop VST2 support. So, in order to be Apple Silicon native, you will lose all VST2 plug ins. I get WHY they're doing it, but man that's going to be a LOT of change at once.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 10, 2021 8:58:44 GMT -6
Thats how i geenrally do it.
If/when you need MIDI on the primary DAW, you plug the keyboard into the primary’s midi and the primary midi out TO the secondary. Audio connections remain the same. Youuse a midi track in the primary. You can sequence midi just like everyone did for the first 20 year of midi.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 3, 2021 19:56:21 GMT -6
As I stated, there are different camps on dither. Whether you want to take Harrison or Meridian engineers (not to mention Ohlsson or Chris from Airwindows) word over Waves. Benchmark is taking the stance very specific to the direct outs to a DAC. Not something I've tested--like I've said many times--I take a lot by the book. If someone I trust has looked into it and recommends I do that, what's the harm? None. Don't care to try to debunk that. I'm completely open to the idea that straight to DACs might not require it...
Suffice to say...there are uses for a post fader insert. Dither is ONE that REQUIRES it. Don't want to use that? Cool. There are others.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 3, 2021 11:25:03 GMT -6
Yes, you could do what you're suggesting-riding into a limiter isn't abnormal for a vocal(but see below). But, also dithering to direct outs...you've no doubt seen all the L1s all over CLA's sessions? Post fader--to optimize level for the DAC feeding the analog desk. Airwindows Console series uses it to band aid the summing. When I'm playing a VI, which spits out a 32bit float signal to the DAW(so all of them), I apply dither post fader to write 24bit to disk. For a single piano--little less difference than printing 16ch of Superior3 through various DSP. Unlike the vocal example, the others can't effectively be handled by a bus. I mean you can just have a vocal bus with the limiter and ride the channel fader...and get what you're describing. The others require post fader inserts to work at all. Apologies if I'm being silly here but when did dithering change from the mastering process? If you're adding excess noise at multiple locations generally you're just adding more noise. Modern converters run at near 24 bit quality (which is of course 144dB dynamic range) at that stage the noise from the digital converter is louder than the required level at which dither needs to be applied. CLA up until not that long ago was using old 80's Sony converters which would now be upstaged by a prosumer level audio interface. When we're changing everything back to 16bit for distribution sure, 24 bit+ does not require dither. It's a very popular belief that dither it irrelevant until you have to do a huge reduction to 16bit. Which my understanding is... just wrong. Any audio DSP done in floating point requires dithering back to 24bit. How big of a difference does that make in the real world? Maybe not enough for you to care. I've blind tested printing a VI audio with and without. Airwindows (dev) guy made quite a long winded video about it some years ago and after he tested the theory, he now dithers the output of ALL his plug ins. He makes about 10 kinds of stand alone dither. If you want to know the geeky 'whys'--I'd direct you to his hour long geek ramblings on such.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 2, 2021 21:59:02 GMT -6
Yes, you could do what you're suggesting-riding into a limiter isn't abnormal for a vocal(but see below). But, also dithering to direct outs...you've no doubt seen all the L1s all over CLA's sessions? Post fader--to optimize level for the DAC feeding the analog desk. Airwindows Console series uses it to band aid the summing. When I'm playing a VI, which spits out a 32bit float signal to the DAW(so all of them), I apply dither post fader to write 24bit to disk. For a single piano--little less difference than printing 16ch of Superior3 through various DSP.
Unlike the vocal example, the others can't effectively be handled by a bus. I mean you can just have a vocal bus with the limiter and ride the channel fader...and get what you're describing. The others require post fader inserts to work at all.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 2, 2021 9:13:47 GMT -6
Post fader inserts should exist in a DAW. Dither. Limiting/clipping. Airwindows fix for summing. But, this isn't a Reaper (or LogicX which doesn't have them either) bashing thread. FYI -- I use post fader in Logic on occasion. It is possible. ?? Do you mean aux sends? We’re talking about post fader inserts. Like the plug in is put into the signal flow after the fader.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 2, 2021 9:08:05 GMT -6
Of COURSE this is a downgrade from an 8700k. Review the only video I posted in this thread, by one of the only Apple Logic users on the Youtube who obviously knows how the app works.
For audio DSP, guy got 2 Abbey Road Plates in series and 4 on their own Auxes (so parallel)….my vanilla 8700 does 3 in series and i stopped after 12 on their own auxes, because frankly, point was made. An 8700k could probably get a fourth in series, due to a little faster boost clock—and mine could do the fourth, but it broke up a little….and I don't count “almost”…
See the guy load his big SD3 preset in 4sec? Mine took 6 to load that. A new PCIe4 motherboard and drive is the difference vs the pcie3 nvme in a Coffee Lake system.
These chips represent wonderful performance per watt. Thats not some new level of DSP performance. Those arent even in the ballpark of the same thing.
I mean if you want to run Luna, sure, you need a Mac and this will be more suitable than say the last baseline mobile chips. Its hard to say how much real world downgrade it will be, since youre using UAD, which will bottleneck long before a modern intel chip. But, technically, you will have less audio floating point DSP at your disposal vs the 8700k….and less RAM for sample buffering unless you get a Pro w/32gb. Your nvme drives in a TB sled will not have the speed theyhave on the pcie bus in the PC.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 1, 2021 20:43:46 GMT -6
Post fader inserts should exist in a DAW. Dither. Limiting/clipping. Airwindows fix for summing. But, this isn't a Reaper (or LogicX which doesn't have them either) bashing thread. It's about ProTools--and I'm really curious what the killer feature is for you, John. I mean what is THE feature/function you're not able to get elsewhere...? Just because I get 99% of shit I mix in PT. Not that consolidation is a huge deal. But it’s another step and any playlist is not included. It’s just another pita. ...that's good enough reason if someone is sending you PT sessions to MIX. I just think songwriting. Sounds like you have to maintain a license. That makes it costing more even more of a black eye.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Dec 1, 2021 12:28:51 GMT -6
Post fader inserts should exist in a DAW. Dither. Limiting/clipping. Airwindows fix for summing. But, this isn't a Reaper (or LogicX which doesn't have them either) bashing thread. It's about ProTools--and I'm really curious what the killer feature is for you, John. I mean what is THE feature/function you're not able to get elsewhere...?
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 28, 2021 15:03:35 GMT -6
The Keyscape Wing upright isn't comparable to A U3...which I own, FWIW--is an upright grand. 52". And NOT made at the turn of the century.
Addictive did the U3 well for cheap AF, eInstruments maybe a touch more realisticly, and Synthology did it most accurately--they used a U5, but that's the same piano with more ornate appointments. If anyone cares--DIFFERENT than the U1 which is a lot brighter and "yamaha sounding/feeling" if that makes sense. I suppose many won't care which is more authentic...but, I thought I'd chime in for anyone who IS fixated on the U3/5 sound.
Anyway--those modern Yamaha uprights ARE a different beast that vintage axes.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 21, 2021 14:54:15 GMT -6
The thing is….usign a second computer with a secondary interface and monitoring at the same place in time you do for other analog audio inputs IS the set and forget low latency way to work. I did all that HD work on the macbook with a buffer of 2048. Hardware level VI latency. How? It ran on the PC tower at a few ms….monitoring on the Macbook interface hardware mixer. You could save a couple more on an analog mixer, and just make sure your compensation engine is set for that to be the reference. Running it inside your DAW (if its not cubase) means futzing with buffers up and down to balance VI latency and audio DSP. Using VEPRo adds at least an extra buffer of latency. For the entire local AND remote machine. Sorry popmann but all I understood was perhaps what I suggested IS in fact the only set and forget low latency way to work? Right? Everything else went over my head, do you suggest I work this way? - with two separate setups? Is it easier than going the Vienna ensemble route? I’m just trying to get more VIs going quickly with less latency so I can be more creatively trying different sounds during productions. Don't fully understand the disconnect. Vienna Ensemble increases latency. It IS "more like what you're used to"---because all your VIs remotely load--initiated from the VEP plug in inside your main DAW project. The audio comes back into audio channels in your DAW. You don't have to interact with a second mixer UI. It is CLOSER to the philosophical idea of "offloading them to another machine". If you use a secondary interface on a second computer it's lower latency. It's a completely different workflow than having the VI hosted in your DAW. You need to use a hardware mixer (like nearly all interfaces have) for monitoring. You set the main DAW to 2048 (or whatever makes sense to be big enough for mixdown)...and you set the VI machine at 128 or whatever makes for a snappy response. You shouldn't have to adjust them really ever. Certainly not on a regular basis. But, also--you won't get your VI presets loaded when you open a project. So, "easier"....isn't a single thing. To ME....VEP has some very specific use cases, but seems like way more trouble to set up than it's worth--but, I sequenced external MIDI devices for 10 years before software. It is ABOLSUTELY a learning curve that might be like learning a new language for someone.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 20, 2021 19:36:45 GMT -6
Always print audio with one or two machines.
But, if I need to record midi, that happens on the DAW box….until I get the strings or whatever wheee I want it—then I print that as audio.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 20, 2021 11:26:33 GMT -6
The thing is….usign a second computer with a secondary interface and monitoring at the same place in time you do for other analog audio inputs IS the set and forget low latency way to work. I did all that HD work on the macbook with a buffer of 2048. Hardware level VI latency. How? It ran on the PC tower at a few ms….monitoring on the Macbook interface hardware mixer. You could save a couple more on an analog mixer, and just make sure your compensation engine is set for that to be the reference.
Running it inside your DAW (if its not cubase) means futzing with buffers up and down to balance VI latency and audio DSP.
Using VEPRo adds at least an extra buffer of latency. For the entire local AND remote machine.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 20, 2021 11:20:45 GMT -6
VEP does all over ethernet. No secondary interface. Yes it “takes care” of whatever you think is a problem. There no digital connections. No need for “clocking” a second machine. One of the primary benefit is that the VI can run at its native rate without regard to the project sample rate.
If you ignore the ethernet apps that make it all synchronous and MORE latent than running it on the same machine (removing another advantage of the second machine)….its literally like using ANY external kidi device, which if youve never done it is lifht years more complex than a VI living inside your DAW. I forget how many people never did that for the 20 years that it was the ONLY choice.
I wouldn't run VEP or Audiogridder if they paid me. It removes nearly every reason I like using a second machine.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 18, 2021 10:47:15 GMT -6
Yes, there are apps on the App store which can do this. Edit: Seems to be possible with a cable connection too. (Google knows everything)
You may like a different - Idea:
But it's maybe an even better idea to use it as a server to run CPU intensive VSTis such as complex B3 Organ etc. Its donation ware.... audiogridder.com/I think popmann has mentioned this? Using a second computer to run VIs? Absolutely. Gold standard. Second audio interface. Connect via ideally analog (and one way MIDI) cabling. AudioGridder? Never used it. Heard about it...read up and something made me completely ignore it-haven't looked at recent developments. Don't remember what that was, but I find that idea of doubling (or 4x) the latency of your DAW and making the sample rate required to be synchronous with the project, so you don't have to have a second (small IO) interface...kinda...chincy and missing the benefits of having a second machine. Vienna Ensemble Pro is the go to for this and has been for years. ...but, if you run things MIDI all the way to mixdown--and fan out SD3 to it's 32ch output and put processing on those LIVE audio busses at mixdown...it will be a BIG shift in your workflow to use a second machine. You will see much more benefit for (what I feel like from reading is) your current workflow by limiting your "everyday" soundset to what you can fit on the internal Apple storage (and spending to make that big enough) and put the rest (older legacy instruments) and audio/project files on a Thunderbolt SSD.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 16, 2021 14:29:36 GMT -6
I certainly found it made a positive change in a lot of instances. the "full range mid/side piano" preset sort of takes any sampled piano I have and "cleans it up"--it sounds like..."the same, but recorded better" if that makes sense.
I did an amp sim track recently that had this boxy resonance in spots...it cleaned that right up.
...now the negative? Those observations are in (mostly) isolation. When I apply it to that amp sim guitar track, and the lead vocal and the stereo piano (sample) in that song and toggle them globally on vs off in mix context? Irrelevant. Hard to even hear the cumulative effect. And it eats CPU for breakfast. Those three instances used about as much CPU time as the whole rest of the mix minus the Abbey Road Plate, which is always the UUUgee CPU suck.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 16, 2021 14:22:41 GMT -6
Since this is a current thread on sm7 love/hate, little story....I was finally getting around to demoing Soothe2...and the first thing I noticed was how it pretty easily "fixes" my issues with my Gefell, which I wouldn't call harsh, but more little boxy bits that only come with louder notes-I had tried to reel them in with various multiband dynamics before, to no avail...here's the reason I post this here: It did nothing positive with the Sm7. Now, I should point out, I tend to analog EQ either on the way in some...but...I couldn't get Soothe to NOT be lossy with the Sm7 when blindly flipping between. Hijacking topic... but what caused the boxiness do you think? Pulling away from the mic and pulling in more room sound as a result? Might be. Sounds more like a transformer saturating/ringing to me, but it doesn't have to be exclusively one or the other--it can be whatever combo of that frequency resonating something, including in my throat/mask, the room, the odd headbasket, little tiny output transformer.... It's nuanced either way. Not something I typically bother with correcting. I screw with it when I get "neo digital" tools. And it was jsut funny that I felt like AFTER Soothe got done yanking those things out, it sounded more LIKE the Sm7 (without)....so much that I pulled up an sm7 track to see what it did to THAT...
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 16, 2021 13:17:58 GMT -6
Since this is a current thread on sm7 love/hate, little story....I was finally getting around to demoing Soothe2...and the first thing I noticed was how it pretty easily "fixes" my issues with my Gefell, which I wouldn't call harsh, but more little boxy bits that only come with louder notes-I had tried to reel them in with various multiband dynamics before, to no avail...here's the reason I post this here: It did nothing positive with the Sm7. Now, I should point out, I tend to analog EQ either on the way in some...but...I couldn't get Soothe to NOT be lossy with the Sm7 when blindly flipping between.
Now, the more relevant observation might be which do I prefer the digitally "soothed" Um70 track or the digitally air'd up Sm7? I didn't have a single take done through both, which is the only way to really know that. But, suffice to say I stand by singer/songwriters starting their studios with an Sm7 and Sm81. Not because they're THE BEST mics...at all....but, because they will NOT be the bottleneck to a professional sound the way I fully have experienced (here and with tracks I've been sent) that a $1500+ LDC at home can be. I'm NOT suggesting it's their end of the road....but, a baseline. IF you have a problem getting good sound with those, it IS something else getting in the way. One or the other will record any given source "well enough". And if ALL you want to do is vocals with virtual instruments, you can skip the 81.
|
|